Hi Erdem, On 6/14/20, Erdem MEYDANLI <emeyda...@gmail.com> wrote: sic > > I do agree. That would be such an invaluable tool. BTW, speaking of > particular hardware like FT245 gives me an idea. Well, this might sound a > little bit irrelevant, but what about taking it a step further and > developing a mini-SDK (NX-SDK) as the one Zephyr has? Still not as a very > active contributor, but an enthusiastic follower of the NuttX project, I > think that the entry barrier of the project is still not that low. > Onboarding takes some time. Having a custom SDK that includes not only a > tracer, but also other helper tools (e.g., flasher/debugger for the > supported boards) would facilitate the adaptation process of the newcomers. > Finally, rather than relying on some particular ICs, would it be more > practical to build such a tool by creating a (custom) fork of OpenOCD? >
In the past NuttX used to have a Buildroot that was able to generate the toolchain, etc. It is still around, some time ago David Alessio fixed it. At first place the SDK idea appears good, but there are many issues. We have many architectures, we support MCU/CPU from 8 to 64-bit (Zephyr and others are 32-bit only and mainly ARM, RISC-V and Xtensa). I could go on citing other issues... Currently at least on Linux (Debian, Ubuntu, ...) and Ubuntu Shell on Windows it is very easy, just some apt/apt-get away. Even the kfrontend is already there, you don't need to compile it anymore. I think the main issue is that OpenOCD version is too old. But creating a fork of OpenOCD is not a good idea. OpenOCD is a project that deserves more attention, it is like the SSH, many people/companies uses it and people only not it was a "backbone" when it broke. The last OpenOCD release was 3 years ago and I don't see any move to a new release. If they release a new version now, maybe it will delay about 2 years to get it officially on Linux distros. I heard that OpenOCD was going to be part of Linux Foundation, but nothing happened yet. Let see! BR, Alan
